F1 2007 Season

[PeterWolf]

Originally Posted by BigFoot

Don't agree why it's ok to buy engines and not chassis?

Because you still bring technology/development/flavor through chassis/suspension/hydraulics etc.

[BigFoot]

Teams can still do it, just buying a chassis off the shelf shouldn't preclude being able to develop it going forth.

[PeterWolf]

Originally Posted by BigFoot

Teams can still do it, just buying a chassis off the shelf shouldn't preclude being able to develop it going forth.

No BF that's not how it works. The A(parent) teams filter development down as it becomes available tested or untested - depends on decisions of the A team. So you get duplicity.

[Chrispy]

Originally Posted by BigFoot

Don't agree why it's ok to buy engines and not chassis?

The simple answer is that it's illegal, under the concorde agreement. It will be ok next year, with the new agreement though. But as STR and SA have done something that has been negotiated by intelectual property lawyers. STR did last year what SA have just done in running someone elses year old design, after buying the IP. STR are in a tricker positio withe RBR as they've both bought thier cars from an external supplier that is not a competing team (Red Bull Technologies). But that was very carefully set up and negotiated with the FIA.

The problem is that it's totally screwed over Spyker, And could very well do significant damage to Williams and Toyota, or any other team that is struggeling midfield on a given weekend.

If it's right or sensible are not issues. Is it legal? Spyker and Williams stand to loose hundreds of millions of pounds between them, but then this has been brewing for at least 6 months.



I know I've been scarce latley, been busy. I will try to post a few things tomorrow.

[BigFoot]

Originally Posted by PeterWolf

No BF that's not how it works. The A(parent) teams filter development down as it becomes available tested or untested - depends on decisions of the A team. So you get duplicity.

Fair point, hadn't considered that the teams share owners, unlike for instance in CART where Teams can buy off the shelf chassis but still retain independence.

[BigFoot]

Originally Posted by Chrispy

I know I've been scarce latley, been busy. I will try to post a few things tomorrow.

Please do, it's always very interesting

[PeterWolf]

Originally Posted by Chrispy

, but then this has been brewing for at least 6 months.

And Frank was against this since day one. It does most damage to the midfield - imagine instead of fighting or passing 2 cars you have to pass/fight with 4 identical cars. And we are yet too see the effects of the rpm limit which i think will make overtaking much harder. So it is a bigger problem and not just the legality of it

[PeterWolf]

Originally Posted by BigFoot

unlike for instance in CART where Teams can buy off the shelf chassis but still retain independence.

I don't think that is a good example(never mind who owns the team) since there is virtually no development chassis wise or for that matter engine wise(it's controlled as well i think) in cart.....or was that Champ car........or both

[BigFoot]

Probably both.

[Chrispy]

Re: Luizzi - He looked very good on the way up the ranks, but has failed to impress in F1 so far. Maybe he'll do better this year. He's basically got three teamates (in near identicle cars) so it'll be a big test.

Re: Bruno Senna - I first knew Bruno when he came into British Formula 3. He had a fair degree of natural talent, but wasn't very focussed. Somedays he wanted to race, and he was good, some days it was like he'd rather stay in bed. It all came so easily that he wasn't hungry. LAst year though, he shifted, and did develop that hunger that drives you forwards. He was a championship contender, but his campain ran out of steam towards the end of the year as it because unlikely for him to beat his teamate (Conway) to the title. I think GP2 might be a bit too big of a step for him, but he's got the money, so may as well continue to cut his teeth up there.

[dpat]

Originally Posted by Chrispy

The simple answer is that it's illegal, under the concorde agreement. It will be ok next year, with the new agreement though. But as STR and SA have done something that has been negotiated by intelectual property lawyers. STR did last year what SA have just done in running someone elses year old design, after buying the IP. STR are in a tricker positio withe RBR as they've both bought thier cars from an external supplier that is not a competing team (Red Bull Technologies). But that was very carefully set up and negotiated with the FIA.

The problem is that it's totally screwed over Spyker, And could very well do significant damage to Williams and Toyota, or any other team that is struggeling midfield on a given weekend.

If it's right or sensible are not issues. Is it legal? Spyker and Williams stand to loose hundreds of millions of pounds between them, but then this has been brewing for at least 6 months.



I know I've been scarce latley, been busy. I will try to post a few things tomorrow.

Yep Chrispy - that is the point it is illegal until next year to do this so Williams and Spyker are well within their rights to protest if they thik they have a case. Will be interesting subplot to the whole weekend.

I see Massa, Kimi, Fernando et al all playing down their respective chances of a win this weekend and saying 'all the other are favourites except me' sort of thing. To be expected

[BigFoot]

Bugger, I may end up missing the race

[Chrispy]

Melbourne Season opener....

Results:
1. Massa
2. Raikkonen
3. Alonso
4. Kovalienen
5. Hamilton
6. Kubica


What are other proples predictions?

[Chrispy]

What's up with you Biggie? Why would you miss the race?

[Chrispy]

Williams and Spyker are quite sure that they've been cheated by SA and STR bending the rules. Unfortunatly for them, the bending was done with the endorsement and blessing of the FIA. They most they can hope for is that RBR, STR and SA are not classed as manufacturers, and so are excluded from manuacturers championship point scoreing, and thereby the ensuing TV payments and travel subsidies which are worth millions. Will they succeed? Hard to see it.

[Chrispy]

Champcar is a one make championship, for chassis, engine and gearbox, wiring loom, ECU's. Many of the teams tweak their own aero mods, and all tweak their own dampers.

IRL (Indy Racing Lauge) have two chassis options and two engine options, and race mostly on ovals.

In both categories there is almost no car evolution. The aero teaks are tiny (maybe 0.1 second over a season) and dampers are adjusted for each circuit, but don't generate laptime over a season.

It's the same case with GP2, Formula 3, Formula Renault, F BMW etc.

F1 is the only remaining open-wheeled series where constuctors manufacture their own cars. Until some bunch of clowns turn F1 into another clone series with the vile hope of having even grids and close racing. Impementing solutions to a percieved problem without understanding why the percived problem exists in the first place.

[dpat]

seen this everybody http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/57322

[AlfaJack]

Originally Posted by dpat

seen this everybody http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/57322

Nah, not needed, F1 is a lot about awareness of your rivals!

[Chrispy]

That is such crap. It been tried and dropped several times before. The fact is that brake lights on F1 cars are useless. In Melbourne 2002 when Ralf ran straight up the back of Rubens in Turn 1, Rubens had a brake light on. Ralf still rear ended him.


In F1, you're traveling so fast, that if someone brakes unexpectedly when you're in a position behind them, you're going to touch. It's as simple as that. The closing speeds are so great that there just isn't enough reaction time.

Maybe the next rule will be to have two chevrons visible between cars at all times?

[Chrispy]

Also, following on from previous posts, the FIA has decided that for this year the roll hoop camers will be red for a teams first driver and yellow for the other, as opposed to the black(carbon) and red plus yellow T-car of last year.

Wonder how many board meetings that one took. And why?

[dpat]

Ah yes the FIA, justifying their existence. Didn't know brake lights had been tried before though.

[AlfaJack]

Originally Posted by dpat

Ah yes the FIA, justifying their existence. Didn't know brake lights had been tried before though.

nor me, I guess its the same as the "rain light"

[Chrispy]

Yep, it's the rain light, super bright red LED's, triggered off of the existing brake pressure sensor.

[dpat]

Originally Posted by Chrispy

Yep, it's the rain light, super bright red LED's, triggered off of the existing brake pressure sensor.

ah I see, cheers Chrispy, it is great having you here

[AlfaJack]

Chrispy, sorry if you have been asked already (long thread) are you out in AU at the moment?